Damn, it looks so much like the query builder I've made in PHP... I've been thinking about making something similar in Java.

If you have problems, FIRST TRY SOLVING THEM YOURSELF, and if you get errors, TRY TO ANALYZE THEM, and ONLY if you can't help it, THEN ask here.
Otherwise you will never learn anything if all you do is copy-paste!Discussion breeds innovation.

Zoey76 wrote:About Javolution, I do know the project lead there (we are facebook buddies ) and we are waiting for the stable 6.x version due we have customs in our outdated 5.x version

Your Javolution "customs" are irrelevant and unnecessary for an application conceived without threading issues... oh wait, you are right. Sorry about that. Still, I suppose none of you actually knows that javolution 6.1 is officially out since December 2013? I suppose that neither of you actually tried it...right?

Zoey76 wrote:About c3p0, we had bonecp for a little while and it didn't work very well, so we didn't invest much time, there are other alternatives, maybe in the future we will change it, for now c3p0 is an stable, active, clean and reliable api that we have come a long time

Bone-CP wasn't really what I was thinking about, but since you went up there, I can also say that Bone-CP performs if applications are correctly designed, and can keep their threading issues in check. Bone-CP access is so fast, mostly because the access to the database is that much closer to "raw". There is no "fat" to serve as a buffer or crash cushion for applications of sub-par design. c3p0 is, in that sense almost idiot-proof. So it is easy to understand why it is so much easier to stick with it.

UnAfraid wrote:
The better option is to implement hibernate and use JPA approach but that requires hell of a changes to be implemented right.
So either we do it correct or we don't do it at all.

So you have a roach infestation in the house, and you wish to use a nuke to solve it. You can't be bothered to use normal roach spray because it needs too much button pressing, while the nuke is just one press and you can sit back and watch it go down...? But, it is true. When (if...?) L2J manages to get that implemented, I'm sure it will go up by a thousand points in it's bragging value. The way it stands now, most of the people that use it are even ashamed to admit to use L2J. Private servers lie about not using it. It's a nice selling point to attract players. And before you think about it: I use L2J ... but as a plugin library for the purposes I see fit for it.

UnAfraid wrote:Do you have performance issues with c3p0?
Weird i had over 3k players with c3p0 and i didn't had issues.
Neither nBd he had 9k (almost) with c3p0 and it was working pretty good are there nowdays such servers?

Excuse me, how many years ago that was...? Can you claim to do the same with current L2J clean beta/stable (take your pick they are the same, the way they are now)? How about specs. of the server where that ran...? No wait, I can guess. CPU load probably ought to have been through the roof on all cores, if you tell me otherwise I will not believe a word of it, because I know how it used to work back then. Obviously with a big enough system, you can hold/run whatever you want in it without problems. To use that as backup to claim that "everything is fine", is at least laughable. Servers running efficient software last longer, and keep running expenses to a minimum, representing overall more ROI (Return Of Investment). But I guess this might not be up your alley, of course, L2J is in the end just a nice educational project... among other things.

And here we have the reason why l2j has been hogging more and more resources over the past years, a complaint heard now more than ever... Lack of optimization.

If you have problems, FIRST TRY SOLVING THEM YOURSELF, and if you get errors, TRY TO ANALYZE THEM, and ONLY if you can't help it, THEN ask here.
Otherwise you will never learn anything if all you do is copy-paste!Discussion breeds innovation.

If you have problems, FIRST TRY SOLVING THEM YOURSELF, and if you get errors, TRY TO ANALYZE THEM, and ONLY if you can't help it, THEN ask here.
Otherwise you will never learn anything if all you do is copy-paste!Discussion breeds innovation.

Hello! I am not known here, though I follow L2jServer for nearly 6 years, so I will take my time and try to say something.

I really think this thread came in a good time, when the project seems to need deep breath to settle some things down. It's initial purpose was very clear as the requests of it. However, for the reason I beleive to be the most trouble maker, they were diverted.

Zoey76 wrote:It's like if jurchiks had duplicated itself

I don't think that answers like this will help at all, specially from autor of the thread, who I suppose is the most interested on it's answers in order to take the next decisions about the future of the project.

UnAfraid wrote:

jurchiks wrote:There will be a difference in performance.

Do you have performance issues with c3p0?
Weird i had over 3k players with c3p0 and i didn't had issues.
Neither nBd he had 9k (almost) with c3p0 and it was working pretty good are there nowdays such servers?

Neither this, because basically is said that since L2j can handle 3k/9k players, it needs no more improvement. It contradicts the fact of the project being still active, also.

But returning to my previous point of the trouble maker, by following the discussions over the threads on the forum, it appears to me that most conclusions are made based on who is talking instead of what is being talked. The interaction between the team and the members entered some personal level in which disagreeing answers basically say: "You're wrong and what you're saying is stupid" by the time it should be "You're wrong because of...".

Also, I believe this discussion about "L2j Format Standards" is no more than a "misunderstood". I really doubt the existance of such issue since all the code can be quickly formatted. In my opinion, what's been tried to say is contributors don't get their shares commited with any "good" explanation or have their work ignored or taken as useless. It simply demotivates them as it takes some time to do whatever is being shared.
This is the point where the L2j Standards enter. The code just don't fit the way devs think it should be placed in the project.
Following this, I ask: if devs are like any other member, but with commit permissions (among other things), why the word of the community about the quality, stability and whatever attribute can be given to a share is rarely taken in account over a dev word?
Why their work isn't shared to be avaliated before getting commited?
How codes out of standard imply in more work to the team than no code at all?
The community has good content-providers that may not be as good as devs on the team or aren't as active as them, but it does not implies their work is bad.
Having incomplete or buggy (to certain level, of course) things on core is better than not having it at all. It gives more room for improvement. It reaches more people than a simple thread.

On the other hand, the community seems not to understand that devs are members with priviledges. They are people with other things to do and cannot dedicate fully to this project. Just normal! Also, this placement seems to give the idea of "perfect coding" and bugs are not acceptable. That's not how it should work.

This is not supposed to be a dispute to point out how bad the other's work is or how wrong their ideas are. Let's try forget the personal level and reach a professional one. It's not because it's user **, who you personally don't like, that his sayings must be shrugged off.

Carlos_Ed pointed out interesting things that should be seriously taken in account if this thread has any intention of being put in pratice. He is, actually, the one who pointed the issues he thinks there are in the project in the most clear and "soft" way. No one likes to be criticized, but this topic is basically for this: discussing problems. Just think we can be polite and nice to others. Flaming takes nowhere and brings no health to the talk.

Please, do not take my hypotesis to the extreme. I don't think shitty code should be commited just because it was shared, neither good shares should be commited in no time without avaliation.
And by avaliation, I mean improvement suggestions, tests, not qualifying it as "good or bad".

My answer was short and trivial, because I see that people concentrate so much effort on stuff like:

X contribution(s) I made wasn't committed because a team member(s) didn't care or didn't had time, instead of thinking why other contributions were committed and what did they have better than that X contribution I use any chances to remind everyone that developers don't commit stuff!

Other stuff that is being mentioned a lot, and doesn't bring anything to the project is:
We did X feature or change and for L2j it's impossible to do because <insert any reason here>, that's why people makes and use forks!

Using Javolution 6, BoneCP, Hibernate or any other new implementation won't save the project, it'll be part of the improvements we have been doing for years.

When I started in L2j, none cared about what I though or I did, after I worked for months and my work was ignored, some team member noticed some small parts of this work and gave me some room to work, after getting commit rights I ended up committing my own work shared months ago.

This means that anyone that keeps trying will eventually get it's reward.

Anyway, I tried to change that, I opened Adv. Users group for almost everyone that fits the criteria DrHouse and ThePhoenixBird planned long time ago, instead of waiting for users to prove themselves to the mighty developers.

I also pushed to include and defended many users that for different reasons weren't welcome on the team and they did a great work and some still do.

I have to say that many members wasted the chance they got when we brought them closer to the team, but of course none wants to talk about that.

Open-source is hard, I barely get a thanks for my work once a year, mostly people complain and demand stuff to be done or fixed, some even hate me (without knowing me), not everyone is up to the tasks.

Zoey76 wrote:My answer was short and trivial, because I see that people concentrate so much effort on stuff like:

X contribution(s) I made wasn't committed because a team member(s) didn't care or didn't had time, instead of thinking why other contributions were committed and what did they have better than that X contribution I use any chances to remind everyone that developers don't commit stuff!

Other stuff that is being mentioned a lot, and doesn't bring anything to the project is:
We did X feature or change and for L2j it's impossible to do because <insert any reason here>, that's why people makes and use forks!

I agree, but in my point of view, such things happen because people have in mind that the Dev. Team work only for the project. This is why I think proposing their works to avaliation and being more open to discussions and decisions with the community should change this.

Using Javolution 6, BoneCP, Hibernate or any other new implementation won't save the project, it'll be part of the improvements we have been doing for years.

Agreed. However, these are only examples of proposals that seem to be "required" by the community but constantly denied or not given so much attention as people want.

When I started in L2j, none cared about what I though or I did, after I worked for months and my work was ignored, some team member noticed some small parts of this work and gave me some room to work, after getting commit rights I ended up committing my own work shared months ago.

This means that anyone that keeps trying will eventually get it's reward.

This is your case and I totally agree with you, but not everyone. I see in many places people "bumping" or asking "is this going to be committed" or "anyone tested it" and so on... Perhaps because you are very skilled and may have had some other "reward" for your work with stuff non related to L2j. But think as a not-so-good developer, will it be encouraged to do something else or be "ashamed" thinking his work is useless?

I also pushed to include and defended many users that for different reasons weren't welcome on the team and they did a great work and some still do.

I have to say that many members wasted the chance they got when we brought them closer to the team, but of course none wants to talk about that.

That's another thing... Your part is done and it's clear, at least it should be, for everyone. Your proposal of "renewing" the team accordingly to their work fits very well here.

Open-source is hard, I barely get a thanks for my work once a year, mostly people complain and demand stuff to be done or fixed, some even hate me (without knowing me), not everyone is up to the tasks.

That's why I say talks should be less personal (for this cases, there's skype, facebook and etc). People usually aren't grateful for the help they get, but very hateful if the don't get it as desired. Nothing specific to Open-source, in my opinion.

Zoey76 wrote:X contribution(s) I made wasn't committed because a team member(s) didn't care or didn't had time, instead of thinking why other contributions were committed and what did they have better than that X contribution I use any chances to remind everyone that developers don't commit stuff!

Actually, nobody has said anything about that in this thread yet, but since you brought it up -- we all know that their contributions were committed because they were personally closer to the team leadership, with some rare exceptions (minor HTML fixes and the like).
I, for one, don't care who is writing the code, I care about the code itself.

Also, watching from aside reveals who is being preferred over whom quite fast. You don't see that so well when you're the one doing the committing.

If you have problems, FIRST TRY SOLVING THEM YOURSELF, and if you get errors, TRY TO ANALYZE THEM, and ONLY if you can't help it, THEN ask here.
Otherwise you will never learn anything if all you do is copy-paste!Discussion breeds innovation.

Zoey76 wrote:[...] This means that anyone that keeps trying will eventually get it's reward. [...]

@Zoey - I think you might be misunderstanding a few things people are trying to voice on this topic. Just this sentence alone evidences it. The sentence itself isn't false, per-se, because I know the majority of volunteers of open-source projects do this at least for "fame". Like, "I did <whatever> and this <insert popular project here> uses it!". There are cases, however, that couldn't care less for this and their "reward" is to see the project they are interested in evolve in a better path. This may not even have anything to do with writing code. The way I believe you are understanding what you are commenting with this sentence, is as if you are narrowing it down to people seeing their commits getting accepted, and have their names "immortalized" in the L2J repository logs. I've done a bunch of past snippets and fixes of easy integration into L2J in the past, I didn't see my name on any credits, and I still recognize them on today's sources. What I was actually disappointed, was that these snippets were not used in the way I designed them to, and as such, they may be actually causing borderline-case problems. I couldn't care less about my name on the credits, so I would appreciate if people don't start throwing that argument into discussion.

jurchiks wrote:[...] we all know that their contributions were committed because they were personally closer to the team leadership, with some rare exceptions (minor HTML fixes and the like).
[...]
Also, watching from aside reveals who is being preferred over whom quite fast. You don't see that so well when you're the one doing the committing.

This is, spot on, part of the image the community has of higher ranked L2J developers (there is a lot more, but I'm doing my best to keep things civil...). This should be changed, for real, with true action. Not just opening "pretend-we-care" topics, and then stuff stays the same. Even assuming the intent of changing is true, hence why I broke my silence here, if no tangible moving action come of this within a reasonable time frame, this will hurt L2J... no, this is already hurting L2J enough to cause "ranked" people to show mild "interest" in topics such as this. Unfortunately, despite the good momentum the topic is gaining, I haven't seen any real sign of any intention on taking advantage of this. For the time being, it seems this topic is raising the collective awareness of the community. It would not be smart to keep disregarding everyone's comments as "rants", which IMO is the idea that is rather getting across from the developers to the people commenting on the topic. I am trusting this is not the intention of the L2J team, but this might actually be aggravating things. Taking care about this is also a must!

t0p3a wrote:Customs would be nice and even a l2jserver paid version with many custom stuffs which should be cheap ;p to get.

L2j will never be paid. It's open-source. It's forks or mods can be payable but will not be developed by L2j. Customs will be made even by me and shared as soon as we get some stuff cleared in core so customization will be able to be done fully DP side.

some times ago we invited Zoey to be part of L2J team and later part of Inner Circles. It was not due his servility but due his attitude and actions he did for L2J. He deserved our trust and helped to evolve this Open Source project. Im very thankful for this and kudos to him.

After i was reading this thread, i realized that some visitors didnt payed attention to how things work here. Just to explain shortly, Open Source does not mean that this project is owned by public. Open Source means that the code people are developing here is free to get and free to user under some license conditions. Based on this facts and the facts that L2J has some community build around this project, i need to remind all of you that community DOES NOT OWN L2JSERVER.

In the past, we try to avoid conflicts and tried countless times to look from other perspectives on our project, even through eyes of those who heavily insulted all the time other community members, developers and even those who maintain the project, the Inner Circle members. Ive realized that this isnt the correct, respectful and grateful way. This is way of those who are either not capable to understand that they DO NOT OWN US OR L2JSERVER or those who just troll cause their nature is like that.

Based on all the insults and "wise" not constructive criticism ive been reading during last time, we decided to create forum group where post of those who belong there will be moderated. Its up to you how you will mark this action, if censoring or dictature or whatever else, we do not to care. We all need to get inner peace to work on this project and this is the way we will go for it since all other ways have proven themselves as useless. From now, any insults, personal attacks or other not tolerable behavior towards anyone on this forums wont be tolerated.